Search New Zealand employment-law guides, ERA determinations, Employment Court decisions and topics.
Results for unpaid wages
![LEBRETON v DA HAI INVESTMENT LIMITED [2025] NZERA 451 - Unjustified dismissal found (employee succeeded).](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)
Da Hai Investment treated Ms LeBreton as a casual worker despite an ongoing pattern of part-time work and an original offer suggesting minimum hours. The dispute covered the true status of the relationship, how it ended, sick leave, lost remuneration and statutory breaches.
Mr Kumar resigned from JK Hospitality after alleging he was repeatedly denied proper breaks and practical support at work. The ERA considered whether those breaches were sufficiently serious that resignation was a reasonably foreseeable response.
Big B Cartage said Mr Tyack had resigned by text, while Tyack maintained he had not and later attempted to return after a period of medical incapacity. The case turned on who actually ended the employment relationship and whether the employer could rely on the alleged resignation.
Boya Trading summarily dismissed Mr Zheng by text on 26 May 2023, alleging that he had refused to work and abandoned his employment. Mr Zheng said there had been no warning or consultation and raised dismissal and disadvantage grievances the following month.
Ms Jiang worked for Trusted Touch Therapy under disputed casual-employment paperwork and later raised dismissal and minimum-employment-standard claims. The company entered liquidation after the investigation meeting, and the ERA also considered inaccurate wage and time records.
Owaka Motors dismissed Mr Murray after he lost the driver licence required for his work. He also alleged mental-health discrimination and failure to provide an employment agreement, while the ERA examined whether the employer adequately investigated alternatives and heard from him before dismissal.
Rotorua Quarry treated Cameron Rix's absence as abandonment and ended his employment. The ERA had to decide whether his conduct showed an intention to permanently walk away from the job and whether the employer was entitled to terminate on that basis.
Ms Thing's dispute with South Pole IP Holding concerned whether the end of her employment was a dismissal or resignation and whether the employer's earlier conduct had unjustifiably disadvantaged her. The case required the ERA to distinguish direct or constructive dismissal from separate disadvantage grievances.
